Best Mooney Model for the Mission Question

[igorbly]

Quote: ChrisH

Going over the mountains low on a regular basis will be tricky with wx/wind (mountain wave). Putting o2 on a child will be impossible. I love my 231, but if this was my mission with MSA's on your route of over 12k, I'd look at (better if it was FIKI)

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-P210-RILEY-ROCKET/1980-CESSNA-P210-RILEY-ROCKET/1231191.htm?

Or, better a twin (Aerostar would be great, and you can find deals...but operating costs will be at least 3x).

 

Chris.

[231flyer]

Byron, your numbers are dead on.  I worked out the actual number for my 3 planes below:

231 Malibu Mirage Lancair IV

Fuel: 11 gph X $6 =$66/hr 21 gphX$6=$126 18gphX$6=$108

Oil: 1 Q every 4 Hr = $2/hr $2 $1(auto engine)

Annual: $1200/100hrs = $12/hr $1800/100=$18 my time

Maintenance: $1000/100hrs = $10/hr $1500/100=$15  $500/100=$5

Hangar: $180/mo = $22/hr $350/mo=$42/hr $200/mo=$24/hr

Insurance: $1800/100 = $18/hr $3500/100=$35/hr $10/hr(liability only)

 

Total: $130/hr $238/hr $148/hr

 

My Mooney still rules!!! Obviously I have not included the various subscriptions, recurrency training, medical etc that are common across the board.

[KSMooniac]

Quote: igorbly

That is a great looking plane. I actually have the P210 and T210 in my spreadsheet, but I didn't expect them to be championed on the Mooney boards! It is a possibility, though.

[aviatoreb]

Quote: igorbly

That is a great looking plane. I actually have the P210 and T210 in my spreadsheet, but I didn't expect them to be championed on the Mooney boards! It is a possibility, though.

[Mcstealth]

igorbly,

You have gotten lots of advice.  Here is my 2 cents.  I have been flying in the Denver area for 40 years most the time in a turbo airplane.  I have owned a Ray-Jay powered E model, a T-210 and an M Mooney (FIKI) which I still have.  Turbocharging is the most worthwhile thing to have flying over ther western US.  Pressure is also nice but comes at a high marginal cost.  I have not had much problem with kids using O2 but I know people who have.  You are not always going to be high enough that you need to get O2 on your passengers but it will probably be wise for you to use it while flying.  DA is high in the summer and turbos help with take off and climb.  Turbos also give flexibility on long trips that you sometimes need.  On the other side of the coin, turbos cost more to operate and a lot more if you like to operate like the salesman tells you.  Known ice is nice but its the turbo which as bailed me out when I have found ice.  I have looked at Lancairs several times and have always seen lots of problems.  If you are an good mechanic and have time to devote it might work.  Insurance is a costly problem.  Good luck in your search.  Probably best to decide which airplane will fit your mission and become an expert on that airplane and then shop diligently for the best one you can find.  Looking for the least expensive airframe to fill your mission is usually not the most economical way to buy an airplane especially turboed ones.

[johnggreen]

Igorbly,

I have had the privilege over most of my flying career of owning a business in which an airplane was a very, very valuable tool.  Flying allowed me to conduct a heavy construction operation over four states and in twenty years, I spent four nights away from home.  The parameters of that usage were specific and the time restraints of my trips were always flexible for weather.  Lots and lots of things, uh factors, go into whether an airplane, any airplane can reasonably and reliably provide the utility a particular need dictates.

Sometimes, I throw water, needed reality, onto situations without much explanation.  I usually try to limit that to scenarios where there is little room for debate.  As a life long pilot and with what I consider the moral obligation of my CFII certificate, I am somewhat and oftentimes over zealous in pointing out not the capabilities but the limitations of our small, single pilot, general aviation mounts.

Unfortunately, I no longer fly because I "need" to.  I'm a pilot, a real pilot, it's in my soul, and I savour every opportunity I get to put my J-3 or Bravo in the air.  And oftentimes the Bravo is a real time saver and functional tool.  The J-3 as well.  More often, it is not.

Anyway, had a moment this morning to opine and just don't want anyone to think I don't love it.  That being said, I just made three trips, all doable with the Bravo, on Delta.  It was, in those cases the wise and practical choice.

Have a great day and fly safe,

Jgreen

[KSMooniac]

Thanks for sharing that sentiment, John.  I suspect you're one of the more experienced (and varied) ones here with regard to ownership and utility of many different planes, and that perspective is quite valuable IMO as a guy still on his first plane, and one that flies for pleasure and personal/recreational transportation, not business.

[sreid]

I don't see that there is any difference between flying your airplane for personal/recreational transportation, or flying it for business transportation.  Either way we're just humans flying an airplane, trying to get from place to place, dealing with internal and external pressures to complete a flight.  And at 6pm Sunday night, personal flying quite literally morphs into business flying because you need to get home so you can work Monday morning.  The airplane capabilities, pilot capabilities, and the limits that you're required to impose on the utility of the airplane are the same regardless of the mission.

[Skywarrior]

Now, don't laugh - this may be a great solution for your needs:

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20F-EXEC-21/1968-MOONEY-M20F-EXEC-21/1238369.htm?dlr=1&pcid=17527

Plus, it's being offered by All-American Aircraft. And the asking price is only $75,000.

Has a RayJay, and a 430. Low-time engine.

Would give you altitude and speed, with cash left over to actually *operate* the thing.

These folks sell infant cannulae: http://www.tri-medinc.com/TM/nasal_cannula.html

Chuck M.

[igorbly]

Quote: Skywarrior

Now, don't laugh - this may be a great solution for your needs:

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20F-EXEC-21/1968-MOONEY-M20F-EXEC-21/1238369.htm?dlr=1&pcid=17527

Plus, it's being offered by All-American Aircraft. And the asking price is only $75,000.

Has a RayJay, and a 430. Low-time engine.

Would give you altitude and speed, with cash left over to actually *operate* the thing.

These folks sell infant cannulae: http://www.tri-medinc.com/TM/nasal_cannula.html

Chuck M.

[Becca]

Quote: igorbly

201 - 165 KTAS

[Skywarrior]

Here is a MooneySpace thread about M-20Fs with TN:

http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=2&threadid=10&postid=9139&page=1

 

[Parker_Woodruff]

Anything not FIKI is just not going to work for this mission. You need a safe altitude above the mountains regardless of the season. In the summer, you're still facing freezing temps at altitude.

 

My predicament with a non-FIKI turbocharged airplane is a bit different in that my typical Florida-Texas round trip can be accomplished at low altitude where freezing temps are generally not an issue.

Do not consider anything without FIKI. Even if you don't plan to fly in forecast ice, the last thing you want to do is be stuck in, or on top of an ice layer. Or worse, have to worry about climbing thru such a layer to clear terrain...while laden with ice...and the family on board, etc

[M20F]

Quote: igorbly

[Seth]

From the terrain noted, I think it makes sense for you to go Turbo.  The 252, 231, Bravo, and Rocket are all fine to use, but O2 with young ones on board may be an issue.  A pressurized cabin may make more sense.

-Seth

[m20flyer]

It's not super sleek and it's certainly not as efficient as a Mooney, but the CE-T310Q (or Q2) is an outstanding instrument platform, is a decent ice carrier, AND will keep flying when an engine quits/loses power (many, many twins won't). I'm actually looking for a Mooney-F now, but if I ever wanted to take my (future) family over the rocks on a regular basis, single engine IMC w/known ice in the area wouldn't be my first choice.* The 310 line isn't pressurized though, so that might be a dealbreaker with the baby in tow. Additionally, with the T310, you're talking about a pair of TSIO-520s so fuel burn and OH costs are certainly drawbacks to consider. I'm not a fan of partnerships, but have you considered fractional ownership of a decent known-ice twin? There are a number of pt135 current 300 series Cessnas available that might fulfill your mission requirements quite nicely.

Just my $0.02. I still like Mooneys more...

*Single engine into IMC doesn't worry me, it's the ice that does. Life can get real bad real fast.

[mooniac58]

Totally not Mooney related but I am looking at adding a Baron 58P to the company fleet for some of the reasons mentioned here. I haul little kids and make really long trips (700-1200nm) quite often. As it is now the wife loads the plane up to the gills, the kids keep growing and I am finding in the summer I cannot take more than 45 gallons of fuel on board to feel comfortable. I would still like to drop a turbo STC in my J but I can't see putting O2 on the kids (1 and 2 years old) so I am left to look at pressurized aircraft. The only semi-affordable options are the 58P or the Malibu Mirage. I lean at the 58P because it is 300K less than a Mirage and that will allow me to keep my Mooney

[John Pursell]

I'm sure that you have checked out www.beechtalk.com for all the information on BE-58P's.

John

[stevesm20b]

I think a Cessna P210 would be the best choise. There are a lot of nice ones for under 160K. 190kts, pressurised cabin, lots of room, 6 seats, FIKI, 1000 mile range.

[RJBrown]

This trip requires a turbo. Anything else will be a disappointment. I had a Rocket before, It would be ideal for this trip. In an attempt to save money I now own a MSE. It is now for sale because it is inadequate to use in and over the mountains. From Denver east the J is a great plane. From Denver west the J simply does not cut it. 150 kts is optimistic at 12,000 but at under 9 gph it is cheap. The Rocket I had exceeded book at every altitude. Conrad did not fudge the numbers, check the Rocket website for them. With long range tanks non stop is easy either direction. I used 200 kts 20gph to flight plan. Range can be extended considerably by running 55% instead of 75%. I did not have TKS and never missed it. Ice in the dry west is different than in the humid east. Because of the loss of speed and usefull I will not look for TKS in my next Rocket. The big advantage of the Rocket is more than just pure speed. It is the ability to climb quickly. I have seen 1500 fpm @ 26,000 light and over 1000 fpm there at gross.

About oxygen and children it is different for each one. My youngest daughter who I began flying with us when she was three fought wearing it. The only time it would stay on her was while she slept. My youngest flew with us from birth. He wore a child size mask from day one without a problem. We live at 6000' and all feel comfortable 12,500 or less with out O2 except the youngest daughter. She is now 19 and will not fly without O2, she has motion issues and O2 helps.

A stock K model is limited in what it can carry and how fast it can climb. A Rocket will carry more higher and faster than any other Mooney.

Delta will ALWAYS cost less and be safer and more reliable than a personal airplane. In a private plane speed, safety and reliability go up with an exponential cost. For me a Rocket is the most Performance I could afford. Though I could spend more and get less performance. In aviation everything is a trade off there is no perfect solution for everyone. 200 hours a year in a Rocket would cost $35,000 or more. Upgrades and special toys extra. This figure assumes a paid for airplane and does not consider the " loss" of income from not using the airplanes value to earn more. Airplanes are expensive toys. If you can afford the expense there is nothing like the flexibility it will bring you. Who wants to ride the bus when you can have your own car? Especially now when just getting on board the bus is a two hour hassle. Even a cheap plane like my J would cost $25,000 a year. If these numbers don't work take the bus, save your marriage.

[igorbly]

Thanks for sharing your experience. At this point I am probably still a year away from buying a plane, but I relish reading everyone's opinions on Mooney performance and economy. The Centurion is still on my spreadsheet too, for those who are making that recommendation. We're taking our newborn on his first airline ride in a couple weeks, so we'll ease him into flying that way, I suppose.